Is it Better to Edit During Writing, or the End? Part 2


In part 1, we looked at the editing during the writing process, and the problems it might cause to the overall flow of the story. In this second part we’ll look at editing after the first draft has been written, and whether this process is more suited to a polished, finished product.
Editing After Writing
Most writers separate the two tasks of the writing process – writing and editing –and treat them as such. The first part of the process is the writing, getting the bare bones of the story written and laying the foundations with which to build a brilliant story. The second part of that process – editing – follows a short down time which allows the writer to come back to the story refreshed, with new ideas and a clear understanding of the plot. This down time separates the writer from the story in an objective way.
Writers do a read-through prior to actual editing. This gives them an idea how the story actually reads, however, the constant tweaking of editing as you go means this is just not possible.
Unlike the start-stop process of editing as you write, leaving this process until the story is written allows for an unfettered storyline that is more focused in detail and ideas, even if it is the first messy draft. That’s because the story has been allowed to happen without interference.
Not only that, but it will have taken less time to write because there is no constant back and forth trying to constantly edit everything. The argument here, of course, is that the editing process is just as long anyway, so how is this way more efficient?
It’s more efficient because the first draft, followed by the first edit - as two separate processes - is much quicker than the first draft being editing from day to day, tweaked, changed, then written, then tweaked, then written and then finally finished, only to have the same proper editorial process applied anyway, because even though the writer has edited during writing, it will not be ready for publication. It will still need editing properly. So the process takes twice as long as is necessary.
Mistakes that have been made in the first draft are much easier to spot during a proper, focused first stage edit, and that’s because the writer has taken some time away from it and therefore doesn’t fall into the trap of “not seeing the wood for the trees”. It’s also much easier to spot more complex errors in the characterisation, the plot or the continuity of the story and its events. That’s because the whole of the story is being observed, rather than in snippets.
Plot flaws, sub plots problems, cohesion of story, flow, pace, chronological events, continuity...all these are much easier to spot than they would be if editing as you go. And because there is no “interfering” of previous chapters during the writing process, then it stands to reason that the latter part of the story – the most important part of the entire thing – actually makes sense because earlier events tie in with concluding events as they should. Writers who edit as they go miss this cohesion, which is why their stories meander unnecessarily or lose focus.  
By “seeing” the whole story from start to finish, it’s much easier to see what elements have worked and which ones haven’t. This just isn’t possible if you edit as you go, because of the constant changes. With the whole story, some things can be cut, some added, and some changed to make the story much better and stronger. It’s also possible to see story flow, correct pacing and correct continuity errors.
Of course, the best thing about editing after you’ve written the story is that you can add metaphor, similes, motifs and symbolism, foreshadowing, character motives, themes and other complex aspects to certain scenes or chapters, characters and situations that you can’t do if you edit as you go.
Pros and cons aside, the general advice is to leave the process of editing until the whole story is written. Of course, writers can do as they please when it comes to their writing, but there is general advice and certain guidelines in place for a very good reason.
Next week: Is it important to have a clearly defined antagonist?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Chapter & Novel Lengths

Just how long should a chapter be? What’s the best length? And does a novel have to fit into a set amount of words? These are just two of the most common questions asked by writers.   They assume they have to work to a strict template of X amount of words and X amount of chapters, usually because most novels have around 30 or 40 chapters and around 80,000 words.   Novel Lengths Firstly, let’s dispel a few myths - novel lengths are dictated by the story itself, not the writer or the editor or a specific written formula.   Secondly, writers don’t have to fit their word count into generic set amounts.   Again, the story will dictate how long the novel will be. It’s also worth knowing the different types of novels that work well with different word counts.   Uncomplicated stories containing minimal characters tend to be short – usually around 20,000 to 60,000 words.   These are called novellas. Longer, more complex stories, which contain a handful o...
Read more

What Makes a Story Dark?

If you’re a horror writer or you love to write dark, psychological stories and thrillers, or moralistic tales, this is the one question that needs an answer. Wanting a dark story and writing one are two different things, so how do you actually make a story dark? To answer that you first have to understand what is meant by ‘dark’. We usually define ‘dark’ as quantifiable elements that we know and are familiar with, but it’s more than that. Dark doesn’t necessarily mean scary or gory with a crazy psychopath going around chopping people into bits. Instead we have to think of ‘dark ‘as anything outside our accepted rose-tinted reality. Dark is the underbelly of our society; it’s the handling of ideas, themes, social issues and behaviours that would be seen as morally unacceptable. It’s less about fictional monsters but more about the real monsters that lurk in the shadows, something that is underscored by our fears and anxieties. It’s the unknown, because the things we don’t know ...
Read more

Modifiers, Intensifiers and Qualifiers - Part 2

Unlike modifiers, which modify words or phrases, an Intensifier is a term for a modifier that amplifies the meaning of the word it modifies. An intensifier is used exclusively to modify adverbs and adjectives and is placed  before the word it is meant to modify.  In simple terms, the intensifier emphasises adverbs and adjectives - it makes them more intense . The word is derived from Latin, meaning to “intend or stretch”. In grammatical terms, the intensifier lends no weight to the meaning of a sentence other than to give it an additional emotional nuance to the word it is modifying, however, since they modify adverbs and adjectives, they should be treated in the same way adverbs adjectives – used little and sparingly wherever possible within your writing. This is where learning to spot them will benefit your quality of writing. Intensifiers are attributive and serve only to fill space, so unless there is a valid reason to intensify the meaning and emotion ...
Read more